Some people ask if the Second
Amendment applies to the State and local governments.Some people have the feeling that the purpose of the Second
Amendment is a limitation on federal action "only",
and that the states do not fall under its sphere of authority.This is not a correct evaluation of the Second
Amendment.

Some people think that the courts
have the right to apply the Second Amendment to the states via the 14th
Amendment and this would require even more erosion to states rights. The
damage that the 14th Amendment has caused is due to its overall
misconstruction, and particularly, in Section I of the 14th.The 14th Amendment has been used
to satisfy the imperialistic federal thirst to consolidate all authority over
the states unto itself.

The reason that the Constitution was amended by the
addition of the first 10 Articles (the Bill of Rights) was due to the great
lectures for about three weeks, delivered by Patrick Henry in the Virginia
State House.The 10 Articles comprising
the Bill of Rights were ratified by all 13 states after the foresight and the
enlightenment bestowed upon them by Patrick Henry.Until the Bill of Rights was added, the Constitution was slated
to end up as a monarchy as it had offered no written protection for the rights
of the people.

Patrick Henry presented many
criticisms relative to the Constitution without a Bill of Rights.Fortunately, he was victorious in his
efforts, which is why we now have a proper understanding of the purpose of the
Bill of Rights.The inclusion of the
Bill of Rights as a part of the Constitution has rightfully acclaimed it to be
the most magnificent document ever struck off by the hand of man; provided,
that the people fulfill their obligations and responsibilities to the
system.

The founding fathers did not
write about things that did not exist.Keep in mind that the founding fathers could not issue a prohibition on
a given subject without stating the existence of the particular subject
matter concerned.The Bill of
Rights was acknowledged as a confirmation of our God-given rights.After Patrick Henry expounded upon the lack
of provisions necessary to guard the natural rights of the people, it was the
view of the states that these rights were inviolate and they were ratified in
December 1791.

When the 14thAmendment was
written, the federal government wrongfully seized the position of being the
“enforcer” of the Bill of Rights, when in all reality, the “enforcement” was
actually being levied against the federal government.

Are you aware that before the Bill of Rights became
attached to the Constitution it was actually a separate document of its own
self, with its own Preamble, which began as follows:

“The Convention of a number of
the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a
desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that
further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added:And as extending the ground of public confidence
in the government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution:”

Notice it says “declaratory”
and “restrictive”.The founders
were establishing existence and protection for the most endangered rights by declaring
them essential.So, as you see, the
Bill of Rights is also a positive source that confirms, documents, and guards
the existence of these essential rights of the people.This endowment from the Creator was encased
in a non-repealable palladium.

While guarding against federal
encroachments, the authors of the Bill of Rights certainly were not bent upon
allowing their own states to encroach or violate these rights and
provisions.Henry made sure
that the linchpin of all liberty, the right to arms, would no longer go unrecorded!In other words, at the same time that the
rights of the people and powers of the state were being confirmed, they
were also being enshrined as a prohibition primarily upon federal powers.

Yes, the barrier was placed upon the federal government, but
the founders, representing the states at that time, did not leave state
officials able to do what they had forbid the federal government from
doing!That would not make sense!The people of the 13 states and their state
representatives made sure those rights listed in the Bill of Rights applied to
all of the people in all of the states.

The states compiled the Bill of Rights, as they believed
it to be self-evident that these were the endowments from the Creator.This is a verification that these rights are
unalienable, deserving of a sacred storehouse so that no man could violate
them.Rights given to man by the
Creator are beyond the purview and prerogative of our fellow man to alter or
violate.

Federal use of the 14th
Amendment “to apply the Bill of Rights to the states”
was totally unnecessary!That
was connived for the enhancement of federal control over the states.All that was really necessary was to pass a
federal law, declaring the blacks as being full citizens, which in turn, would
declare blacks as free men with full citizenship.As citizens they would automatically be recognized to have the
protection of the Bill of Rights just as all of the people were since 1791.Nothing more needed to have been said;
however, the courts began to interpret Section I of the 14th
Amendment as a revision of federal power wherein the federal government could
expand its authority over the states, and unjustly take superiority over
them.Wrongfully, the tail began to wag
the dog!What Patrick Henry feared
would happen, has come to pass because the people have failed in their
responsibility to issue an amendment with proper wording to end slavery.

There never was any need for the
federal government to seize the position that they held authority to “make the
Bill of Rights apply to the States” via a deceptive Amendment.After the 14th Amendment was so
poorly drafted, the federal government “assumed” and “created” for themselves
an authority over the States that has grown increasingly more seditious.Attached is a 3-page summary sheet of some
of the points Patrick Henry made in those three weeks when he stopped the
ratification of the Constitution and forced adoption of the Bill of Rights.

Henry railed long and hard over allowing the federal
government to take control over the militia, the collective right of the
people to keep and bear arms.(It was
by use of the militia that they won their independence and established
liberty.)“Your guns are gone!” he
chastised them during this time.He
demonstrated that the federal government would have all power and the
people would have no power (authority).He warned that their liberty would be wrested from them.Freedom of speech, albeit an essential,
would not be adequate to do the job of protecting their authority.He told them that they had to retain their
arms as a form of force lest they be ruined!It was necessary that an understanding be made that another
function of the militia existed that was beyond the reach of federal
power.The Second Amendment clarified
that need.

Patrick Henry told it like it is!It is easy to see why the
socialist/globalist/change artists have dropped him from the history classes in
the schools of recent times.The federal
government, which long sought to control the schools, and now does so through
the United Nations (U.N.E.S.C.O.), never wanted to allow future Patrick Henrys
to spring up!

The dual purpose of the Bill of Rights is further
evidenced by the fact that twelve states entered the Union without a
provision for the keystone amendment, the Second Amendment.The efforts of Patrick Henry in demanding a force
to protect their liberties made the right to arms subject so clear and all
encompassing that it gave them security.After his orations, the states, which had not yet signed in on the new
Constitution, began attaching to their Act of Admission to the Union their own
suggestions for rights they wanted to be entered as a part of the on-coming
Bill of Rights.

Of the twelve states that entered into the Union without a
provision for firearms in their state constitutions, four were members
of the Thirteen Original States.Those
four original states were: Delaware, New Jersey, New Hampshire and
Maryland.Eight
additional states entered into the Union without a provision for firearms in
their state constitutions long after the battle over the federal 1787
Constitution had been settled.They
were:West Virginia, Iowa, Wisconsin,
Minnesota, North Dakota, Nevada, Nebraska, and California.

After Patrick Henry’s successful demand in 1788 that a
Bill of Rights be provided in the new Constitution for the 13 original states, all
of the 37 states that later entered the Union included a provision in their own
“Act of Admission to the Union” to cover their need.The provision stated that they were being “admitted
into the Union on an equal footing with the original states in all respects
whatsoever”. Attached you will
find two sheets giving the exact wording that was used by each of those 37
states.This is strong evidence to
support what was meant by the declaratory and restrictive wording
inscribed in the Preamble to the Bill of Rights.

Whereelse will you find included in the
federal Constitution the satisfaction of the demand that was made for a
documented statement of man’s unalienable rights except for in the Bill of
Rights?After such vigorous heated
discussions over (1) the need to limit the ability of the federal
government to invade, usurp, and destroy the authority and rights of the
people, and (2) the need to document and confirm the existence of
unalienable rights of the people (their endowments
from the Creator, including those powers the people were willing to vest in
their own state houses) did it become possible to continue ratifications for
adoption of the Constitution.The Bill
of Rights is a very powerful form of law.

As to the existing 14th Amendment, Sections 3,
4 and 5 cause one to chuckle in view of the fact that there is so much blatant
tyranny and sedition occurring in this country today!Insurrection and rebellion against our proper system should cause
all those federal public officials to be denied any salary who are
constantly giving aid and comfort to our enemies.They have taken an oath to abide by the Constitution.Such claims for payment of services
(salaries) should be held illegal and void, like it states in these
Sections.

In view of current conditions,
and the threat against the right to arms of the people, I feel that the best
move which could be made is a strong push for revitalization of the true
militia – the “enrolled militia” – the people-at-large – which does not mean
the National Guard nor the troops – but the ordinary people, the farmers, the
business men, the teachers, etc. (the like of which George Washington took out
to train in proficiency with arms for the protection of their liberty).

This is conclusive evidence, that
the Bill of Rights has a dual nature: (1) It confirms the people’s right to
arms, individually and collectively, and (2) It restricts the federal
government from interfering with or denying the use of those rights belonging
to the people.

Bernadine Smith, National
Director

Second Amendment Committee

SOME
OF THE CRITICAL REMARKS MADE BY

PATRICK
HENRY

WHILE
HE WAS OPPOSING THE CONSTITUTION

WHEN
IT WAS

UNGUARDED
BY A BILL OF RIGHTS.

This Constitution will trample on your fallen liberty.It squints toward monarchy. It will convert
us to one solid empire.

This Constitution substitutes a consolidated in lieu of a
confederated government, and this threatens the total annihilation of the state
sovereignties.It will lead to a
consolidation of the states into one consolidated government instead of a
confederation of the states.

When government removes your armaments, you will have NO
power but government will have ALL power!What will you do when evil men take office?

You are writing this Constitution as if only good men will
take office.

When evil men take office, the whole gang will be in
collusion. They will keep the people in utter ignorance and steal their liberty
by ambuscade. *

A standing army we shall have, also to execute the
execrable commands of tyranny.

Your guns are gone!What resistance could be made?

Will you assemble and just tell them?Even if you could assemble, how will you
enforce rightful punishment when due?Your guns are gone!

My great objection to this government is that it does not
leave us the means of defending our rights, or waging war against tyrants. Have
we the means of resisting disciplined armies, when our only defense, the
militia, is put in the hand of the congress?......

Oh, sir, we should have fine times, indeed, if to punish
tyrants, it were only necessary to assemble the people.

Let Mr. Madison tell me when did liberty ever exist when
the sword and the purse were given up from the people?Unless a miracle shall interpose, no nation
ever did, nor ever can, retain its liberty after the loss of the sword and
the purse.

Guard with jealous attention the public liberty! Suspect
everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but
downright force, and whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably
ruined!

They are being allowed too much money. They are being
given too much power.

The power of the federal courts would swell the patronage
of the president.

The president will lead in the treason. Your militia will
leave you and fight against you.

The clause before you gives a power of direct taxation
unbounded and unlimited.

Your laws on impeachment are a sham and a mockery due to
mutual implication of government officials.

The cession of the whole treaty-making power to the
president and the senate is one of the most fearful features in this
Constitution, as they can enter into the most ruinous of foreign engagements.

The pay of the members is to be fixed by themselves
without limit or restraint.

You are not to inquire how your trade may be increased,
nor how you are to become a great and powerful people, but how your liberties
can be secured!For liberty ought to be
the direct end of government.

Will the abandonment of your most sacred rights tend to
the security of your liberty?Liberty,
the greatest of all earthly blessings - ­give us that precious jewel and you
may take everything else.

The adoption of this instrument has been maintained upon
the ground that it would increase our military strength. You are negligently
suffering our liberty to be wrested from us.

Even if you could assemble, how will you enforce rightful
punishment when due? Oh, Sir, we should have fine times, indeed, if to punish
tyrants, it were only necessary to assemble the people. A standing army we
shall have, also to execute the execrable commands of tyranny.

The policy or impolicy of any provision does not depend
upon itself alone, but on other provisions with which it stands connected.

I am not well versed in History, but I will submit to your
recollection whether liberty has been destroyed most often by the
licentiousness of the people, or by the tyranny of the rulers.I imagine, sir, that you will find the
balance on the side of tyranny. Happy will you be, if you, miss the fate of
those nations, who omitting

to resist their oppressors, or negligently suffering their
liberty to be wrested from them, have groaned under intolerable despotism!

Let not gentlemen be told that ‘it is not safe to reject
this government’.Wherefore is it not
safe?To encourage us to adopt it, they
tell us, that there is a plain easy way of getting amendments.When I come to contemplate this part, I
suppose that I am mad, or that my countrymen are so.The way to amendments is, in my conception - - shut!

“Hence it appears that 3/4th of the states must ultimately
agree to any amendments that may be necessary.Let us consider the consequence of this.Let us suppose (for the case is supposable, possible and
probable) that you happen to deal these powers to unworthy hands; will they
relinquish powers already in their possession, or agree to amendments?2/3rds of the Congress, or of the state
legislatures are necessary even to propose amendments.If one-third of these be unworthy men, they
may prevent the application for amendments; but a destructive and mischievous
feature is, that 3/4ths of the state legislatures, or of the state conventions,
must concur in the amendments when proposed.In such numerous bodies, there must necessarily be some designing bad
men!”

The least you can do is guard this Constitution with a
Bill of Rights!

Patrick
Henry

The brunt of the battle fell on Henry alone. Madison and
others were accusing him of disunion.Henry told them that the dissolution of the Union was abhorrent to his
mind.He considered himself a sentinel
over the rights of the people, their liberties and happiness. He declared that
even if twelve states had adopted the 1787 Constitution as it was without a
Bill of Rights, he would still reject it.